Jump to content
You are a guest user Click to join the site

Ducks Hockey Forum Coyotes Hockey Forum Bruins Hockey Forum Sabres Hockey Forum Flames Hockey Forum Hurricanes Hockey Forum Blackhawks Hockey Forum Avalanche Hockey Forum Blue Jackets Hockey Forum Stars Hockey Forum Red Wings Jackets Hockey Forum Oilers Hockey Forum Panthers Hockey Forum Kings Hockey Forum Wild Hockey Forum Canadiens Hockey Forum Predators Hockey Forum Devils Hockey Forum Islanders Hockey Forum Rangers Hockey Forum Senators Hockey Forum Flyers Hockey Forum Penguins Hockey Forum Sharks Hockey Forum Blues Hockey Forum Lightning Hockey Forum Maple Leafs Hockey Forum Canucks Hockey Forum Golden Knights Hockey Forum Capitals Hockey Forum Jets Hockey Forum

elmatus

Member
  • Content Count

    1,519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

elmatus last won the day on October 2 2019

elmatus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,216 Excellent

About elmatus

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Brunswick
  • Favorite Team
    Flyers

Recent Profile Visitors

1,799 profile views
  1. I think you're probably right about that, but I don't think we'll be getting a Max Domi out of that kind of trade. At least not unless we're tossing something else that is shinier than Ghost along with him, which frankly we don't have much of right now.
  2. I agree with a lot of this. Ghost should have been traded at least last season of course, but he wasn't. What we might be able to get for the guy now is something fairly questionable unfortunately. First thing of note is that Ghost is expected to contribute scoring more than anything, and he just hasn't done that consistently at all throughout his career. Sure, he's had two good seasons, but then he's had two poor ones, and he's on track for his lowest scoring total to date in 19-20 (~24-25pts). The other reason for his being on any NHL team is to be a PP quarterback. He's been supplanted in that role this season by a much better dman in Provo, and I would argue Niskanen as well. So he's not doing his job. Period. Not only that, but this season isn't some sort of anomaly. He wasn't good last season either. What can we get for a guy like Ghost in a trade? Honestly, probably a lot less than what we'd want. I'm not even convinced Seattle would take him at this point. Hell, even Voracek, universally panned though he so frequently is, remains significantly more valuable to a team than Ghost at this point. To your second point about Domi: I like Domi, but Ghost is definitely not going to cut it. Not only is he on pace for 65-70pts this season, he got 72 last season as well. If anything, he's getting better as he enters his prime years. Getting a guy like that at all would be tough as hell. So not only is Ghost not enough, we may not like what it would take to get him at all. I should add also that Domi really isn't all that tough in the sense you might think. He's smallish, and fast, and skilled, and nothing at all like his dad. I know you're a fan of the Tkachuk types. He's not really that kind of guy.
  3. The bystander effect is a thing for a reason.
  4. I think it's a combination of both things. Certainly it looks like Giroux is declining, which is fair enough given his age I guess. What I'm more worried about at this point is replacements. TK is the only guy we have whose production seems to be improving to a fairly high level. Couts is still hanging strong, but he does need talented linemates to really shine. Beyond that, I'm just not sure who we have kicking around to be part of a true top line in the future. Frost maybe, Farabee maybe, but both of those guys are young and still unproven and could very well max out as mid-six players rather than top line guys. No telling when we'll get Lindblom back, and this is all without mentioning the complete enigma that is Patrick. I guess I'm just worried about future talent. I feel like our recent history is littered with mid-tier guys, and I'm worried that just isn't enough to get it done in this day and age. It's good enough to make us a bubble team, which we've been now since forever, but going beyond that level seems to require more.
  5. As opposed to when it was not so legal? When exactly did you start looking at 29 year old Jennifer Lawrence? Or are you talking some sort of deep fake stuff of another variety?
  6. Solid post. I would add that we may not have a player currently in the system to replace a guy like Giroux. Frost and Farabee are nice to have around, but their ceiling may just be some sort top to mid-six players. I say "just", as if that's not quite a bit already. I'm wary of putting too much stock on these guys though. But to ask either of those guys to have a few 90-100pt seasons is asking a lot. I'd love to see it happen certainly, but that's a lot. This leads us to the problem you noted that, while I have no qualms at all about getting rid of JVR and Voracek, and I'm warming to the idea that we might be better off moving Giroux while we can still get a big return for the guy, losing that much production would definitely set the team back. We'd be looking at some down years almost certainly. That said, it's entirely possible that's exactly what this franchise needs.
  7. NSH just hired Hynes. They fired Lavy yesterday. I agree on the Isles and Knights though, that to me is hugely a coaching thing. It's telling how good Trots seems to be wherever he goes, not to mention how different all of his teams have been really. He seems to be very good at tailoring his game plan to whatever strengths his team happens to have at a given time. That kind of flexibility is tremendous. Rather than try to find players that fit the coach's style, he just seems to find a way to make it work with whatever tools he has at his disposal. That would seem such a tremendously useful skill in a coach. I'm going to want to see more success before I say that. Much to your point, Vegas and the Isles are possibly the two best coached teams in the league right now. We definitely have a more experienced coaching staff than pretty much anyone, which isn't nothing. Without results though, it's hard to say they're on par with the best. I won't lie -- I'm sort of getting tired of this refrain at this point. Again, it's possible, but I'm sort of in the wait and see camp now. I worry this is our fan bias showing across the board. Sure, Provo is doing well, but Sanheim has yet to figure out the physical game, which at this point is getting worrisome to me, Ghost seems to not be is clearly not the guy we hoped he would after his rookie season, and Myers is still too green to tell. Sure, Niskanen helps, but he's not going to be around forever either. At the same time, every year Voracek and Ghost remain on the team their value diminishes. For Ghost, I imagine things are at a pretty low point now. For Voracek, he's just digging himself a deeper hole every time he hits the ice. And that's all without talking about Giroux. It may be about the right time to start talking about trading him as well, while he would still fetch a substantial return. I'm not saying do it just yet, but I might by the off season... We slept on Simmonds and lost. We slept on Ghost and will now lose. We're sleeping on Voracek and will at least be getting less than we could have. When does Giroux get added to the list? I think missing the playoffs this season again probably pencils him in at the very least, and this is coming from a guy who has always liked Giroux (and I still do!). I'm just being realistic here, which is something that has been a challenge for this team for a while now. I really don't mean to be super negative here. I'm just at a point where I'm worried we may very well have been overvaluing our prospect pool and undervaluing the importance of true top-level talent in the modern NHL. The process has been in action for quite some time. Sure, each year brings a shiny new toy, but a number of them seem to be taking their sweet ol time showing their lustre (if they ever do), which only leads to more gaping holes as the Giroux of the world become less impactful on the ice. Do we need a Lafreniere to become relevant? We just might.
  8. I'm pretty sure Patrick will make another go. Whether it'll work out better is hard to say, but I don't think he really has the high gear we might hope from a 1-2 overall pick. If it's any consolation, I don't really think Hischier is going to reach that level either. Lindblom I think should play again too. I'm just not sure when or what we'll get when he does. Morin I think is probably done. Even if he does get back on his skates, he's just had too many set backs. I feel like he's probably done.
  9. At this point, I'm including them. Lindblom is about to start fighting for his life. There's really no telling what the future holds for him as a Flyer. How long does it take to recover from cancer treatment and return to NHL-level hockey player form? Certainly I wouldn't think next Oct is very likely, but I guess anything is possible. Patrick remains an injury prone mid-six guy until he proves otherwise. I think it's very fair to write him off as not being the guy we all hoped we would get. He may have some sort of career in the NHL, if he can find a way to stay healthy for any amount of time, but I highly doubt he'll ever be the kind of elite level talent I was talking about in my previous post. That seems very unlikely. Bottom line, as good as those players are, I really was talking about players who are a cut above that line. Even Lindblom with his break out season would likely cap out at a 60-70 pts, not 90-100. Based on previous play, Patrick might cap out around that same range, but even that would mean him taking a step forward from the 40-50 range he's shown early in his career. If we look at the real contenders in the league right now, we'd have: the Caps (Ovechkin, Backstrom, Carlson), Boston (Pasta, Bergeron, Marchand), the Pens (I don't want to type their names in), Colorado (Mackinnon, Rantanen, Makar), Toronto (Tavares, Matthews, Marner), Tampa (Kucherov, Stamkos, Hedman). What do we have that compares to that? Giroux, Couts, Provo? I mean, I like all three of those guys, and I do think they can be part of a contender, but those comparisons are pretty... bad. That does leave some unique teams like STL, Nashville, the Isles, and Vegas, who don't really have that superstar level guy either. Maybe the question we should ask is what do those teams have that we don't? Better centers? Better def? More depth? Coaching? Goaltending? STL and the Isles both play very heavy games, but Nashville and Vegas don't really, and none of the real contenders I mentioned above are very hard hitting. Still, is that something to consider for the 2020-21 Flyers? Maybe we should have kept Radko Gudas.
  10. The Canes have tons of talent imo. The Isles are unique, and I think a lot has to do with coaching in their case. The Stars and Yotes are not contenders. They're bubble at best imo. They may sneak in to the playoffs, but they'll need some sort of miracle to stay relevant once there, and even making the playoffs is hardly a guarantee for either of them.
  11. Who are you thinking, and how would you get them? Who are our biggest trade chips right now? We'd have a couple of young guns: Provo, TK. And a vet core members who would net a good return: Giroux and Couts. So let's say we trade Provo or TK. Plenty of teams would want these guys, as they are building blocks to build a contender with. Provo in particular would be worth a very nice haul. Who would you consider? Giroux would net a good return on a contending team looking for an edge. They'd have to have about 7M in cap space, which isn't bad at all. The return for him wouldn't give us a high first rounder of course, since those contender teams won't have an early 1st round to offer. He'd probably net a late 1st (maybe two) and a solid prospect and mid-six roster player. Is that worth losing him? Maybe. Couts would likely give us more. He's currently in his prime and plays a two-way game teams cry for all the time. We'd have our pick of suitor for him. What would you opt for? Aside from that bunch, none of the rest are going to change the team very drastically. The most likely trade candidates we have are Voracek and Ghost. I honestly think both are gone by next season, which is a good thing imo. But neither of those guys are going to give us that much in return. And what do we need? What is AV's type of player? His most dominant team was easily Vancouver. Those teams relied heavily on a pair of HOF-bound twins and one of the most successful goalies of this generation. Can we trade all of the above mentioned for that kind of trio? Would any team ever give up that type of trio? Let's say we offer Colorado all of Giroux, Voracek, Ghost, TK, Couts, and Provo. Would that get us Mackinnon and Rantanen? If so, would our team be measurably better losing all those guys? I'm with you in that it's obvious they're not going to contend with this current group. I just don't think it's nearly as easy as "move everyone and get the type of player AV needs." EDIT: I forgot to mention Hart in all that. Who do we get for Carter Hart?
  12. I think we may see some of this, but I don't think we'll see a wholesale shift in the roster. Hiring the most experienced coaching staff of the last decade was a win now move, not a possibly be relevant at some point in the next decade move. Problem is the team as it stands is good enough to be a bubble team, which leads us to more mediocrity.
  13. I agree completely. Looking around the NHL, serious contending teams have some remarkable similarities that we just don't share. We've mentioned this before of course, but one big one is the lack of truly elite level talent. Giroux had a couple seasons of that level, but he's really not a 90-100pt per year guy by any stretch, and we have no other players on the roster who project to be at that level. This is really the mediocrity curse the team has battled for some time now. Homer tried to buy his way to contention, which only really saw limited success, and Hexy opted to try to build a more rounded team that didn't require that level of talent. We've seen both approaches and what they lead to. To me, both of those options have been lacking an essential spark. It's not the only factor certainly. There are some contender-relevant teams who don't rely on top level talent (Nashville and Vegas come to mind), but these are anomalies whose success seems very hard to reproduce. When we look at the truly successful teams of the last decade, the pattern is pretty clear. These weren't stacked teams (aside from possibly Washington). They had a few motors driving the team forward, and a bunch of complimentary pieces mostly there to support and not screw up too badly. I hate to say it, but it's entirely possible what this team really needs most is just to suck very badly for a few years to get top three picks, or otherwise to get lucky on a few who turn out to be significantly better than anticipated. Neither of those are recipes for guaranteed success of course, but recent history seems to suggest it's the easiest way to become truly relevant.

Game Room 1

Please enter your display name

×
×
  • Create New...